Select delivery location
See All Buying Options
Kindle app logo image

Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.

Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.

Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.

QR code to download the Kindle App

Follow the author

Jean-Paul Sartre
+ Follow
More books from this author
Something went wrong. Please try your request again later.

Existentialism & Humanism Paperback – January 1, 1977

by Jean-Paul Sartre (Author)
4.5 4.5 out of 5 stars 149 ratings
See all formats and editions
This volume presents an English translation of a lecture Sartre delivered at the Club Maintenant, along with several pages of dialogue between Sartre and the auditors and critics of the lecture.
Read more Read less
Previous page
  1. Print length
    70 pages
  2. Language
    English
  3. Publisher
    Haskell House Pub Ltd
  4. Publication date
    January 1, 1977
  5. Dimensions
    6 x 0.5 x 9 inches
  6. ISBN-10
    0838321488
  7. ISBN-13
    978-0838321485
  8. See all details
Next page
The Amazon Book Review
The Amazon Book Review
Book recommendations, author interviews, editors' picks, and more. Read it now.

Product details

  • Publisher ‏ : ‎ Haskell House Pub Ltd; New edition (January 1, 1977)
  • Language ‏ : ‎ English
  • Paperback ‏ : ‎ 70 pages
  • ISBN-10 ‏ : ‎ 0838321488
  • ISBN-13 ‏ : ‎ 978-0838321485
  • Item Weight ‏ : ‎ 8.8 ounces
  • Dimensions ‏ : ‎ 6 x 0.5 x 9 inches
  • Customer Reviews:
    4.5 4.5 out of 5 stars 149 ratings

About the author

Follow authors to get new release updates, plus improved recommendations.
Jean-Paul Sartre

Jean-Paul Sartre

Brief content visible, double tap to read full content.
Full content visible, double tap to read brief content.

Novelist, playwright, and biographer Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-80) is widely considered one of the greatest philosophers of the twentieth century. His major works include "No Exit," "Nausea," "The Wall," "The Age of Reason," "Critique of Dialectical Reason," "Being and Nothingness," and "Roads to Freedom," an allegory of man's search for commitment, and not, as the man at the off-licence says, an everyday story of French country folk.

Customer reviews

4.5 out of 5 stars
4.5 out of 5
149 global ratings

Top reviews from the United States

kevin w. wright
5.0 out of 5 stars Sartre
Reviewed in the United States on April 22, 2017
Verified Purchase
I found existentialism and humanism a great read. I sartes a great thinker.
Helpful
 Report
Gips
5.0 out of 5 stars Five Stars
Reviewed in the United States on June 21, 2017
Verified Purchase
Thought provoking
Helpful
 Report
MCR
5.0 out of 5 stars Five Stars
Reviewed in the United States on May 25, 2016
Verified Purchase
Good refresher
Helpful
 Report
Brad
4.0 out of 5 stars Some Thoughts on Morality
Reviewed in the United States on June 12, 2003
Last night I read Jean-Paul Sartre's short manuscript Existentialism and Humanism, in which he set out to defend the existentialist philosophy against criticisms that had been made against it, particularly by Marxists, and particularly for its being (perceived as) overly subjective (amongst other things). I think there is a lot that Sartre says that is just right. Such as, every action is a moral action, including the action of doing nothing. And most importantly, Sartre makes the connection between freedom and morality. This is something that Musil is really sharp on, as well (particularly with the Moosbrugger case in The Man Without Qualities) -- in order for any action to be perfectly moral, it must be perfectly freely chosen; and to the extent that various extra-agent factors impinge on the action, the action is subsequently less moral. This is built into our very idea of what it is to be moral: an action you initiate is something you are morally accountable for; an action that happens from outside of you is something you are not morally accountable for. Now, if as (arguably) the Marxists say, the individual is inextricably determined by the social, there can be no morality, since everything is determined from without. Seen from this perspective, it is clear why many of the existentialists were Christians: Kierkegaard, Dostoyevsky, and Jaspers, for example. However if we are to take the atheistic line (which I believe with Sartre to be the most consistent with the existentialist principles) we say that even God couldn't help us act morally. Sartre illustrates the point with an example (which is appropriate, of course, since existentialism is a form of moral particularism, in that it says we need to act in each new case on the basis of information we have at hand, and no rules can guide us rigidly from case to case). A young man approached him (Sartre) and said that he had a choice to stay at home and care for his sick mother, or to leave and fight in the war. Caring for his mother had concrete calculable benefits over the short term; fighting in the war has abstract, generalised benefits that may, moreover, have been thwarted (he may have been stuck in a camp or pushing paper at a desk, or whatnot). Sartre says, what can guide the man here? No moral rule can determine what his course of action should be; the decision is the man's freely to make; and this free action is what confers the status of a moral decision on it. And so Sartre simply said to the man, do what you feel is right (or something similar). I think Sartre is absolutely correct to say that existentialism is not mired in subjectivity, or in despair. It is not mired in subjectivity, because your morality is something that is exhibited by your actions (we might even say there is no such thing as a moral thought, only a moral action: something that fits well with liberal political principles [as an aside, one of the interlocuters at the end of the manuscript accuses Sartre's moral system of being simply a variant of 18th Century liberal philosophy, a point which has, I think, some merit]). It is not mired in despair, because there is no correct reponse to the absolute freedom on which morality depends; despair is one reaction; glee is another; and none is more natural or correct than another.
6 people found this helpful
Helpful
 Report
Joan Harris
5.0 out of 5 stars Five Stars
Reviewed in the United States on April 20, 2016
Verified Purchase
good read
Helpful
 Report
Loren D. Morrison
5.0 out of 5 stars Man Is What He Wills Himself To Be
Reviewed in the United States on July 3, 2000
EXISTENTIALISM AND HUMANISM did not start life as a book. It is actually a translation of a lecture delivered by Sartre in Paris in 1945 at a time when the term "existentialism" was being bandied about rather loosely. My 1947 copy also incorporates the discussion which immediately followed the lecture. It is interesting to note that, after a few legitimate questions, the discussion became a series of challenges to the existentialist philosophy by a M. Naville who was a leading French Marxist in post World War II Paris.
Contrary to some comments contained in reviews of Sartre's books and collections of his essays, existentialism is not an easily understood philosophy and there were, and still are, differences of opinions regarding existentialism, and what it might mean, between major proponents of the philosophy such as Sartre and Gide. (Sartre alludes to this in this lecture.) For this review I will attempt to stick to the opinions stated herein by Sartre.
He led off his lecture by making the point that existentialism was under attack by The Church on one side and the Marxists on the other. He stated that both attacks were based on misunderstandings of the existentialist philosophy.
As is to be expected, his starting point for his discussion is the basic concept that existence precedes essence, or, putting it into his own words, "Not only is man what he conceives himself to be, he is also only what he wills himself to be." Carrying this to its logical conclusion; man, individually and collectively, is responsible for his own choices and actions. No excuses accepted.
Another often misunderstood term used in defining existentialism is "anguish." In layman's terms, anguish in existentialism has to do with the doubts surrounding making choices. Sartre uses "the anguish of Abraham" to illustrate. When Abraham was instructed to sacrifice Isaac, Abraham had to decide if the instruction really came from a messinger of God, or, conversely, was the messenger a tool of Satan. Then, when he was told not to perform the sacrifice, he was faced with exactly the same dilemna.
What I have covered in the last paragraph was merely the beginning of Sartre's discussion on anguish.
Another aspect has to do with being forlorn. In oversimplified terms, this means that we have nothing such as "human nature" or some predetermined value system to fall back on. Even when relying on someone else's advice our final decision is our own. We are truly responsible for our choices. How much more alone can one get.
Although Sartre discusses many other aspects of the existentialist philosophy, I'd like to leave these discussions to those who choose to read this lecture. I would, however, like to sum up with the following quotation.
"(Existentialism) can not be taken for a philosophy of quietism, since it defines man in terms of action; nor for a pessimistic description of man--there is no doctrine more optimistic, since man's destiny is within himself; . . . . It tells him that action is the only thing that enables man to live. Consequently, we are dealing with an ethics (sic) of action and involvement."
There's a lot more depth to those few aspects of existentialism that I did touch upon. For those who are tempted to use the term, "existentialism," to categorize a school of writing or as an excuse for certain excesses of behavior, or for inactivity, I would recommend reading this lecture as a starting point in understanding the term you are using. If it interests you, you might decide to expand your investigation to include other works on the subject and, perhaps, to further expand, and investigate other philosophical thoughts of both classical and contemporary thinkers.
25 people found this helpful
Helpful
 Report

Top reviews from other countries

Anon
1.0 out of 5 stars Someone talking nonsense for hours.
Reviewed in Germany on July 17, 2023
Verified Purchase
The book reads like a transcription of someone speaking continuously for an hour, without making any effort to simplify complex concepts. On the contrary, it seems as though they subscribe to the saying: 'An expert is someone who takes something you already know and makes it sound confusing.' While I had some prior knowledge about Existentialism, now I find myself struggling to grasp its essence. It feels as if people derive pleasure from presenting things as difficult to appear more intelligent to others. The final debate (Q&A) reveals a person more focused on showcasing their ego than genuinely trying to understand the questions posed. I will have to buy another book on this topic, as this was useless. Avoid!
Report
Manthos A. Mattheou
5.0 out of 5 stars Sartre Defends Existentialism
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on August 11, 2002
Verified Purchase
This book will either make you want to read more about existentialism or it will lead you into making quite the opposite choice by leaving existentialism to others possibly more patient than yourself though not necessarily more intelligent.
Whatever your choice you will nonetheless be making a choice even if that choice is not to make a choice.
Or as Sartre would put it, in a far more philosophical manner, you can always choose but you must know that even if you do not choose that would still be a choice. For what is not possible is not to choose.
This is the first book I have read about existentialism so I cannot judge whether it is a good introduction to this philosophical movement yet the very fact that the purpose of the lecture delivered by Sartre is to offer a defence of existentialism against certain reproaches laid against it, seems by itself to shape the content of the lecture into an attempt by necessity to capture the essence of existentialism. In particular, in relation to the reactions existentialism has provoked.
There are certain key ideas that are very plainly put across to the reader which may well capture one's attention and actually lead to a further exploration of other books about existentialism.
For example, Sartre after referring to the two kinds of existentialists that there are and declaring that he is a representative of atheistic existentialism explains that if God does not exist there is at least one being whose existence comes before its essence, that is to say a being which exists before it can be defined by any conception of it.
That being, of course, is man.
Thus, existence precedes essence. Man first exists and then defines himself.
Basically, in conclusion to his reference to atheistic existentialism, Sartre adds that the first principle of existentialism is that man is nothing else but that which he makes of himself. Not as what he conceives himself to be after already existing but that which he wills himself to be subsequent to a necessary leap towards existence. Basically, man only attains existence when he is what he purposes to be. Whereas, before that projection of the self, nothing exists.
Doubtless this first principle of existentialism gave rise to a reproach against the subjectivity of existentialism. Other ideas and terms used are also examined always with reference made to the particular reproaches Sartre has to answer in relation to such ideas and terms.
All in all, he makes out quite a solid and intelligible defence of existentialism as he explains that the first effect of existentialism is to put every man in possession of himself with the entire responsibility of his existence being placed on his shoulders.
The emphasis in the doctrine presented by Sartre is that there is no reality except in action. Man is described as nothing else but what he purposes with his existence being attained only in so far as he realizes himself. Man is therefore, nothing else but the sum of his actions.
He clarifies further this basic idea by stating - rather poetically in fact - that for the existentialist (though also in reality) there is no love apart from the deeds of love, no potentiality of love other than that which is manifested in loving and no genius other than that which is expressed in works of art.
Throughout the lecture the basic theme delivered by Sartre is that reality alone is reliable and dreams, expectations and hopes serve only to define man negatively and not positively since man is nothing else but what he lives.
One can easily understand how a basic idea such as this could give rise to a reproach for the pessimism of existentialism. Yet, Sartre manages to turn around this reproach and to declare that what people reproach existentialists with is not their pessimism but the sternness of their optimism.
As to the structure of the book, this is divided into three parts each of which can be enjoyed in its own right even though the parts are actually interrelated. First, there is a rather helpful introduction, then the lecture itself and finally the actual discussion that followed the lecture.
An additional benefit to the newcomer to the study of existentialism is the slimness of the book. This means the entire book or any part of it can easily be read time and time again. No doubt each fresh reading will be to the advantage of the reader as it will add to his understanding of the ideas expressed while simultaneously increasing his appreciation of the manner of their expression.
146 people found this helpful
 Report
Andrew McEachron
5.0 out of 5 stars Motivation
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on September 3, 2023
Verified Purchase
As a teenager, this book encouraged me to get off my behind and try to achieve something. Still remember chapters of it over a decade later. Helped in my philosophy exam too.
One person found this helpful
 Report
CLINT McGAVIN
4.0 out of 5 stars Fascinating read
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on October 10, 2014
Verified Purchase
Having read, and been intrigued by, several 'Existentialist' novels over the years, I decided finally to try and achieve a greater understanding of the subject. I must say that I found this book to be a fascinating read. It's divided into 3 parts: an introduction by translator Philip Mairet, followed by the transcribed lecture on Existentialism & Humanism given by Sartre, then lastly a brief Q&A section allowing detractors of the philosophy to voice their opinions. Despite Sartre's sporadic references to the likes of Kierkegaard, Kant, Descartes and Gide (none of whom I'm particularly familiar with) I found this book surprisingly easy-going. It's a fairly slim publication to begin with, so there's not too much to digest in one go, and I was actually able to dip in and out of it without having a problem re-grasping the thread as it were. It's a decent translation too, which helps. I thought Sartre defended Existentialism very well and this book has encouraged me to purchase further related literature. Recommended.
12 people found this helpful
 Report
E. Tan
5.0 out of 5 stars readable
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on October 2, 2013
Verified Purchase
if you are a beginner like myself, this book can be a good start. The book itself is actually a speech delivered in Paris in 1945. Its language is very clear and readable. The basic concepts of existentialism and the criticisms leveled at this doctrine are expressed in a lucid way.

The book consists of three sections. The first 20 page is introduction by Philip Mairet. The introduction provides readers with some backgrounds about existentialism, which i believe does a good job. The second section, from 23 to 70 pages, Sartre lays out the basic concepts of existentialism and differentiates atheist existentialism (advocated by Sartre, Heidegger etc) and religious existentialism ( advocated by Kierkegaard and Karl Jasper etc). In this section, Sartre also addresses to the major criticisms leveled at his philosophy. The final chapter, from 71 to 95 pages, is basically the Question&Answer section after the speech,some people ask questions to Sartre to clarify his position further. Apart from the last 15 pages, it is not difficult the follow the book. But in this section, the discussion between Sartre and a guy called M Naville is getting more and more abstract and make that part of the book hard to comprehend.

My overall impression is that it is a good beginning both to Sartre and Existentialism. Particularly when we consider how difficult the topic is, it is fair to say that Sartre did a good job in his plain style.
6 people found this helpful
 Report